Share this Story : Grande Prairie Daily Herald Tribune Copy Link Email X Reddit Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr

Public spaces, public laws: Grande Prairie limiting equal access to public spaces

Public space governed by private silence is not democracy.

Public buildings should not be run like private clubs. That principle should not be controversial. Yet, in Grande Prairie, access to a city-owned public space is being controlled through unpublished rules, resistance, and silence when residents ask for answers.

Our Nolan Dyck Recall campaign is authorized by Elections Alberta. We are operating under Alberta’s Recall Act, which sets strict timelines and clear requirements for citizen-led democratic participation.

Public spaces, public laws: Grande Prairie limiting equal access to public spaces Back to video

We are a volunteer, citizen-led, Grande Prairie-based grassroots petition initiative. As part of our signature gathering process, we requested to rent space in city-owned facilities so residents could conveniently participate in direct democracy by signing the recall petition.

Our request to rent Centre 2000, a city-owned building, was denied verbally by the Grande Prairie and District Chamber of Commerce, which administers bookings for the facility. The reason we were given was that the chamber’s bylaws do not allow political events other than those involving the sitting government.

When we asked the city administration who is accountable for these decisions, the city confirmed, in writing, that it owns Centre 2000 but has delegated control over bookings to the chamber and does not review or adjudicate the chamber’s decisions.

That arrangement should concern anyone who values public accountability. A city-owned facility is controlled by a private organization. The city has stated it does not review or take responsibility for how access decisions are made. There is no transparency or accountability to the taxpaying public.

Prior to the Centre 2000 request, we sought access to kiosk space at the city’s Eastlink Centre. We were advised by the city’s booking coordinator by email that kiosk space had availability in January. After a delay in response, access to kiosk space was later denied. No written reasons were provided. At the same time, a second-floor boardroom rental was approved. Access behind closed doors was permitted, while access to public-facing space was not.

Public space does not belong to insiders. It does not belong to boards or gatekeepers or decisions made off the record. It belongs to the public. When access to a City-owned building depends on unpublished rules and no one will put a decision in writing, something fundamental has gone wrong in our free and democratic society. If the rules are real, put them in writing.

Equal access to public space requires clear, consistent rules. If a bylaw exists, it should be disclosed. If a policy applies, it should be applied consistently. When access is denied, the decision should be put in writing with reasons. That is not a high bar. It is the minimum standard in a democracy.

Delay carries consequences in a recall process. The Recall Act imposes strict timelines. When access decisions are delayed or obscured, the delay itself affects democratic participation. Silence is not neutral when democracy has a deadline.

After repeated written requests for clarification, went unanswered, we initiated formal access to information requests with the city and a personal information access request with the chamber. Transparency should not require statutory pressure.

This issue extends beyond one recall campaign. It affects any community group that seeks to use public facilities for civic engagement. When access to public space depends on unpublished rules or discretionary decisions made behind closed doors, trust erodes and democratic participation suffers.

Municipalities often partner with outside organizations to manage facilities. The city’s delegation of authority is appropriate, so long as it doesn’t become abdication of accountability, transparency, and fairness. Public authority cannot be separated from public responsibility.

Public buildings should be governed by public rules, applied consistently and explained openly. If a city owns a facility, it owes residents clarity about who controls access and how decisions are made.

Public space governed by private silence is not democracy.

Share this Story : Grande Prairie Daily Herald Tribune Copy Link Email X Reddit Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion. Please keep comments relevant and respectful. Comments may take up to an hour to appear on the site. You will receive an email if there is a reply to your comment, an update to a thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information.

© Daily Herald Tribune